University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

Treaty-Making in Australia and Considerations for Canada

By: Robert Hamilton and Harry Hobbs

Matter Commented On: Victoria’s Statewide Treaty and Statewide Treaty Bill 2025

PDF Version: Treaty-Making in Australia and Considerations for Canada

Indigenous peoples in Australia have long sought to establish treaty relationships with the state. While important advocacy efforts such as the 1988 Barunga Statement and the final report of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation in 2000 failed to lead to negotiations at the national level, a statewide treaty was recently signed in the state of Victoria. The first formal Indigenous treaty ever negotiated in Australian history, the Victorian Statewide Treaty is a novel model of treaty that is worth considering closely in Canada, particularly as Indigenous peoples and federal, provincial, and territorial governments continue to look for productive ways to implement historic and modern treaty promises and craft novel forms of agreement. Creative thinking is required to take steps to meet the Crown’s constitutional obligations to diligently implement treaty promises, proactively assess and manage cumulative impacts on Aboriginal and treaty rights, meaningfully implement modern treaty and self-government agreements, and satisfy its obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Recent discussions about the relationship between treaty rights and a secession referendum in Alberta (which one of us discussed here) also illustrate the importance of thinking creatively about the relationship between Indigenous self-determination, treaty rights, and other democratic state process and institutions. This blog summarizes Victoria’s Statewide Treaty and the proposed bill that will implement it.

A Mugging on Bay Street

By: Bryce C. Tingle KC

Case Commented On: The RRSP Trust of James T. Grenon by its Trustee CIBC Trust Corporation v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2025 FCA 129 (CanLII)

PDF Version: A Mugging on Bay Street

Most corporate lawyers avoid reading tax court decisions. Tax is a pretty specialized practice area, and for non-specialists the entire area of tax law gives off the insalubrious air of a dark alley in an unfamiliar city. Except worse, because in a tax case you know for a fact there is someone down that alley who wants to rob you of your money.

Corporate lawyers should make an exception, however, for the recent decision in The RRSP Trust of James T. Grenon by its Trustee CIBC Trust Corporation v. Her Majesty the Queen (Grenon) by the Federal Court of Appeal. This is because the court finds itself interpreting provincial securities laws in a way that would be very surprising to most non-tax lawyers. In fact, the way the court (i) interprets the term “principal” (found in many private placement exemptions), (ii) the consequences that it suggests follow from imprecise investor representations in subscription agreements, and (iii) the way the court determines what constitutes a “lawful” offering under RRSP rules, all violate long-established securities practice and threaten to destabilize private placements of all kinds.

The Non-Justiciable War on ‘Woke’ at the Law Society of Alberta

By: Drew Yewchuk 

Decision Commented On: Song v The Law Society of Alberta, 2025 ABKB 525 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Non-Justiciable War on ‘Woke’ at the Law Society of Alberta

Back in February 2023, a group of Alberta lawyers petitioned for a special meeting of the Law Society of Alberta (LSA) to hold a vote seeking to remove the LSA’s powers to require its members to engage in continuing professional development and specifically, remove the requirement to complete an Indigenous cultural competency program called ‘The Path’. The petition was defeated at that special meeting: 2,609 votes against the resolution to 864 votes in favour of the resolution. See the ABlawg posts about the special meeting: Law Society of Alberta to Hold a Special Meeting to Debate its Power to Mandate Indigenous Cultural Competency Training and Fighting Over History at a Special Meeting of the Law Society of Alberta.

The Alberta Court of Appeal Weighs in on the use of AI in Court Submissions

By: Robert Hamilton

Cases Commented On: Reddy v Saroya, 2025 ABCA 322 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Alberta Court of Appeal Weighs in on the use of AI in Court Submissions

In Reddy v Saroya, the Alberta Court of Appeal had the opportunity to comment on the use of Artificial Intelligence in court submissions when considering a case wherein counsel had filed a factum containing multiple AI-fabricated citations. This is the latest warning for lawyers, following cases such as Zhang v Chen, 2024 BCSC 285 (CanLII) (Zhang) and Ko v Li, 2025 ONSC 2965 (CanLII) (Ko), that AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) cannot reliably prepare legal materials and should not be used to that end. These tools can be used to gain efficiencies and will surely have an increasingly important role in legal practice moving forward, but lawyers, legal academics, and law students who use them must understand their limits. Reddy shows the cost of forgetting that.

Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

By: Nigel Bankes

Case Commented On: Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2025 ABCA 306 (CanLII) and Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2023 ABKB 108 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

There are two principal substantive issues in this important unanimous decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal (referred to as ABCA decision). The first issue relates to the rules pertaining to the right of a Crown oil sands lessee (Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL)) to produce gas cap (or non-solution) gas in the course of producing oil sands (or bitumen) when the Crown has leased the natural gas rights in the same location (and indeed the same formation) to another party (Signalta). The second substantive issue relates to the legal consequences of the unlawful production of somebody else’s natural gas, specifically the assessment of damages for such unlawful production.

Page 9 of 436

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén